Skip to the main content
Open WellbeingWhat the studies actually measured

Blood sugar and insulin

Psylliumand Hemoglobin A1c

Only one source here so far, and it measured lower hemoglobin A1c.

How sure anyone can be

Low certainty, level 2 of 4

Further research is likely to change this.

The numbers reported

-0.97 percentage points
percentage points of HbA1c change vs control in treated type 2 diabetes

None of these sources gave a likely range — the band the real answer probably sits in — so how precise these numbers are is still an open question here.

One source, newest first

What we read is the published abstract, not the full paper, so a blank below may still be printed in the paper itself. A fixed rule worked this out from the source’s own fields. Nobody checked this rating by hand.

  • Systematic review, 2015

    Low certainty, level 2 of 4

    Psyllium fiber improves glycemic control proportional to loss of glycemic control: a meta-analysis of data in euglycemic subjects, patients at risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus, and patients being treated for type 2 diabetes mellitus.

    Am J Clin Nutr. 2015;102(6):1604-14. doi:10.3945/ajcn.115.106989. PMID:26561625.

    Number reported
    -0.97 percentage points
    Which way it went
    Lower
    Likely range
    Not in the abstract
    Source’s own words
    percentage points of HbA1c change vs control in treated type 2 diabetes
    Who was studied
    Adult with type 2 diabetes
    Compared with
    control
    Amount taken
    Recorded detail — psyllium dosed before meals (dose not stated in the abstract)
    For how long
    Not in the abstract
    Disagreement between studies
    the effect size scales with loss of glycemic control; absent in euglycemia
    Kind of record
    Journal article
    How this rating was reachedstarts at High, 2 steps down: risk of bias and imprecision
    1. Starts at High
    2. Risk of bias brought it down to Moderatethe abstract reports no risk-of-bias or quality appraisal, so study limitations cannot be ruled outNot in the abstract
    3. Imprecision brought it down to Lowthe abstract reports no confidence interval for the estimateNot in the abstract
    4. Ends at Low2 steps down.
    Checked, nothing to step it down for
    indirectness
    Inconsistency
    No disagreement reported, and no count of studies behind it

    Imprecision stops at the first check that applies; others may apply too.

    AI-reviewed & signed — an AI agent re-read this finding against the saved source and checked that the quote, the numbers, the units and the direction match it. No person read it. The owner authorised the agent to sign the batch with the owner's key, and every build rechecks that signature against these exact bytes.

    Read the abstract on PubMed

What is still missing from these readings

  • One gives no likely range, so how precise that number is is unknown.
  • One do not say how many people took part.
  • For how long — Not in the abstract.

Something nobody wrote down is never a zero and never a guess.

Still to read for Psyllium

Ten of the 19 things on our list for Psyllium have no reading here yet:

  • ApoB / ApoA1 Ratio
  • Apolipoprotein A1 (ApoA1)
  • Fasting insulin
  • Fructosamine
  • HDL cholesterol
  • High-sensitivity CRP
  • HOMA-IR
  • Stool frequency
  • Triglycerides
  • Waist circumference

Still to read means nobody here has got to it, not that it was tried and did nothing or that no research exists. A pairing on no list is not a gap: we never set out to read it.

Read next

This is a library, not advice. No recommendation, no dose, no diagnosis, no ranking. We never ask about your symptoms, and nothing here is tailored to you.